BERNIE SANDERS V HILLARY CLINTON - THE FINAL CHAPTER?

-


What strategy to infuse the majority with a probably minority vision?
Politics, it is said is the art of the possible. Some might also say politics is war by other more peaceful or less destructive means. I suspect that, for professional politicians and the team of people and businesses supporting them, their political campaigns, if they are to be successful, have to be fought with military-like planning and precision, with all that tremendous amount of logistical support being deployed behind the political leaders fronting the campaign.

 Next to this massive logistical support which is being deployed behind Bernie ~Sanders and Hillary Clinton, is the tactical and strategic game plans they and their teams are deploying, with, it is to be anticipated, the mastery of a brilliant chess player.
Keeping the right balance between the 'left' and the 'right' to get to your destination.

And so it is, that now, with the final stage of the Primary campaign approaching, both Hillary and Bernie are likely to be reviewing their respective positions. Examining what they have gained and what they have lost so far in this election campaign, and what further gains and loses might or are certain to impact them and the Democratic Party in the run up to and the final stages of the 2016 Presidential Elections.

 Like good chess players, the time is approaching when Hillary and Sanders, in the time-honoured American tradition, need to analyse and assess what compromises they need to make to each other, in order to further the political causes of their respective campaigns.

 I am aware that some of Bernie Sanders supporters will be opposed to him making any concessions or compromises with the Hillary camp, seeing it as a 'betrayal' and probably as 'a pact with the devil', in the form of the 'rotten' Democratic Party establishment.  

 Yet, what those supporters have to ask themselves, is whether they would like to see some of the progressive policies which Sanders is advocating, implemented, as a result of some 'accommodation' between the Hillary and Sanders camps, or risk having none of them being implemented, as a result of a 'total war strategy' which repudiates any strategic or tactical alliance between the two camps, and probably play into the hands of Trump, and give him the Presidency?

 Unless you are an advocate of change by populist and/or violent revolution, such as we have seen in Libya, Egypt, Tunisia and Syria, and which is definitely not going to occur in the United States in the foreseeable future, probably the best and most cost-effective societal political model is one in which the different political and economic interests are able to work together effectively for all the people.
Taking the present train might be your best opportunity, even if it is not going directly to your desired destination.

The gains and progress which Bernie Sanders campaign has made in 2016, cannot be guaranteed in the 2020 election campaign, as nobody knows how the yet to be realised economic, political and social events of the coming 4 years will have impacted on the perceptions of the American people and voting electorate. This means that the Bernie camp cannot and should not be expecting that, in 2020, they will simply continue to build on their 2016 achievements. 

 The American political left or progressives, as it were, would be unwise to pursue 'an all or nothing' political strategy, as opposed to 'an eclectic model', which does not consign them to permanent 'opposition', but seeing them taking tactical and strategic opportunities to become involved in government and influencing policies to make them more progressive.

 It is this form of 'gradualistic' strategy which is more likely to be successful, as it will help to gradually acculturise Americans into losing their fear of 'leftist' or 'progressive' politics. It is, using an athletic analogy, more of a 'relayistic' rather than 'sprintistic' politics, with different administrations building on the progress of the preceding ones, instead of a single administration 'revolutionising all key area of the society.


OWOHROD

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

THE ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN WAR AND HOW ISRAEL'S LATEST ATROCITY MIGHT HAVE SEALED ITS EVENTUAL DEFEAT! P.4.

-
Image
   It is unlikely that things were ever getting better. But, at least the Palestinians were alive, they had their homes, their roads, water, electricity, the basic requirements for having at least a basic life.  They had more freedom of movement in their 'reservations' than they have now, with the storm troopers crawling over and around them as so many wasps.  So, yes, it is likely that, for the majority of Palestinians who are being forced to pay the price the Zionist Israeli State has decided to extract from them, the attack of 7th October might be considered to have been a tactical mistake by Hamas and the other Resistance Fighters. And yet, it could be the case that the overall and eventual outcome of the attack for the Palestinian people will be a positive one. It has broken the then impasse, the stalemate in progressing the realisation of a sovereign and viable Palestinian State.  It has forced the nations and international organisations, ordinary people of the world to t
Read more

JUST A THOUGHT - ARE PRISONS A SYMBOL OF A PUNITIVE SOCIETY? THE END....

-
Image
By increasing the number of statutes by which citizens can be criminalised. So as to provide a sufficient supply of inmates for the prison population.   As we have seen, for example, in the United States of America. The so-called most advanced country in the world.   But also undoubtedly, probably the most retrograde one, when it comes to the manufacturing of criminal laws, and administration of 'crime and punishment.'  Since, not only does it make having more prisoners as a necessity, in order to keep the private companies holding and processing them, and the 'law enforcement departments, in business.  But it also encourages corruption amongst all those involved in the crime and punishment industry, through the quest to generate income and profits. Objectives which they seek to achieve by brutalising inmates and increasing their prospects for having to pursing a criminal career.  By ensuring that inmates being discharged from the prison industry are l
Read more

THE ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN WAR AND HOW ISRAEL'S LATEST ATROCITY MIGHT HAVE SEALED ITS EVENTUAL DEFEAT! P.1

-
Image
  So, what are my thoughts about Hamas' unprecedented attack on parts of Israel, which has resulted in hundreds of men, women and children, some of them soldiers, being killed and thousands of Israelis becoming shocked and traumatised as they have probably never experienced before? And what are my thoughts about Israel's Zionist government's brutal and merciless counter-attack on, not just Hamas' fighters and military, but on all Palestinians and their social, economic and essential infrastructures in both Gaza and the West Bank? The egg did not come 'out of nowhere', and neither did the chicken. Everything of substance and significance has a context which can help us to define and understand it more than we could or would be able to do, without that context.  This principle also applies to Hamas' attack on Israel, just as how it applies to Israel's subsequent and continuing attack on the Palestinians. And so it is that Hamas' attack on Israel was a
Read more

AMERICA'S DYSFUNCTIONAL DIPLOMATIC MODEL! PART 1.

-
Image
Diplomacy ought to be the process by which nations, through their governments, establish and maintain mutually beneficial and peaceful relationships between them; Diplomacy is not, like the Gulf Cooperation Council members and their allies, including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Bahrain and the UAE states, trying to bully and intimidate Qatar into doing their bidding, by surrendering its sovereignty.  Neither is diplomacy what the American government is doing, in using sanctions to force the governments of states of Iran, Russia and North Korea, into complying with its demands.  About what action they should or should not take in pursuing what they consider to be in the interest of their countries and people.  No, none of this is diplomacy. Rather it is method of force and compulsion, which is not synonymous with principle or practice of diplomacy.  Which is about the art of establishing and maintaining peaceful and mutually beneficial relationships between different countries.
Read more